BAC

They are data points. Some are facts, some are interpretations of facts, but every one is grounded in fact, whereas your accusations are not. You're just questioning peoples' motives. You rely on Basch but even he corrected his tweet when he realized he jumped the gun. Your fact/opinion distinction also lacks substance. When I say Ryder and Welsh are comparable wrestlers, is that an opinion? Sure. Is it grounded in fact? Yes, based on Ryder's record/wins -- and I'm yet to hear a single person interpret the data differently. Similarly, is everything Welsh says necessarily factually true? Don't know, but his saying it is a fact, and there's no one with first-hand knowledge saying otherwise. Bottom line is you're simply rejecting all the data and preferring an entirely made-up conclusion, instead -- if I'm reading you correctly -- accusing wrestlers of lying, coaches of cheating and rule-breaking, saying PSU is "just like Lance Armstrong," and so on, all because (so far as I can tell) PSU is your school's rival. Depends what "game" you're talking about. Trying to nab the best talent from the portal? Absolutely. Donors using NIL funds as a carrot? Yup. Coaches contacting wrestlers enrolled at other schools (or directing others to contact them) before the portal window opens, unsolicited, to try to broker a deal for them to transfer to their school? No. That's not the "game." That's a serious recruiting violation, and if caught leads to firings/dismissal, fines, probation, suspension. Does it still happen? With some schools, apparently so. It sounds like you think Iowa is complicit. Is that why you're so quick to trot out the "everyone else is doing it too" defense? I dunno, but just because some are guilty, doesn't mean all of them are. To be clear, none of this is about defending PSU. Were they guilty, or even if there were serious evidence of it, I'd be the first to dogpile on them. I certainly don't think they operate on some higher ethical plane than everyone else. But I do think the vast majority of schools try to follow the rules (muddy as they are), including PSU, if only because the consequences of not doing so (and getting caught) are cataclysmic. But sure. Stick with the "PSU contacted Welsh long ago and convinced him/bribed him to transfer, and now he's lying about it while PSU covers it up" narrative. Free speech is a wonderful thing, though I think you're wise to maintain that "it's my opinion not a fact" disclaimer when you do it.

Just as I thought. You're incapable of identifying one specific thing I said that you disagree with (or any facts to support it), and are incapable of stating what actually caused Welsh to go to PSU if not what he said (or any facts to support it). Just smears, hyperbole and ad hominem attacks.

Sounds like you're just throwing rocks from the sidelines. What specifically did I say that you disagree with, and what specifically is your take, and the facts that support it?

It isn't my intention to question Vak's character, and I disavow that implication. I like Vak and think he is a good dude. But I think a fair reading of his comments is that he's accusing PSU of having intentionally induced Welsh's entry into the transfer with improper conduct, which would be a recruiting violation and highly unethical. That, to me, is a bridge too far and ought not be done without solid basis.

Well, you're not entirely wrong. I don't want PSU to be engaging in recruiting violations, I don't want their coaches conspiring to act unethically, I don't want wrestlers telling bald-faced lies to the public. But it's not PSU-specific. I don't want ANY school or ANY coach or ANY wrestler to be engaging in that conduct, and I'm definitely not going to presume it or make accusations without real facts. Here, there's just no evidence of it, and all facts point the other way. I think you know that too. Honestly, it sounds to me that you're still kind of salty about accusations people made last year about Iowa's transfers which you think are unjust. You're probably right about many of them, as people are quick to accuse Iowa of recruiting violations too. So I guess this is your payback? I dunno Vak. I'm all for pointing out hypocrisy, but I'm just not sure that making baseless allegations against other schools is the best way to go, especially when you're calling into question the integrity of the coaches and honesty of the wrestlers. That's just spite, and I think you're better than that.

One, the fact that PSU had Ryder, who most see as being on Welsh's level, making it illogical for PSU to affirmatively seek out Welsh as a replacement. Two, the fact that Welsh had a prior history of discontent at OSU that is unrelated to PSU, with a confirmed visit to OSU back in December and Ryan having to publicly quell the fire back. Three, Welsh's stated reason for preferring PSU -- that he wanted a stronger training room -- meshes well with his discontent at OSU, where he asked them to get better RTC guys but they weren't able to. Four, Welsh's own words, disclaiming that PSU was ever a foregone conclusion, but rather was one of a couple of frontrunners at the time. Fifth, the fact that the Mineo "done deal" tweets proved to be false (unless you call Welsh a liar), given his indication that he fielded numerous offers, and given the fact that he didn't commit right away. Sixth, the fact that PSU was offering less $ than other schools. Seventh, the fact that Welsh isn't exactly Cael's "type": all tatted up, a temper, apparently not recruited by PSU in high school. Eight, Starocci's pro-Ryder tweet, and Ryder's later departure, suggest that all of this happened very suddenly from PSU's perspective, as it wasn't pre-vetted with the team or Ryder. Ninth, the general absurdity of the notion that Cael, with a bunch of consecutive titled and strongly favored to win at least the next couple as well, would suddenly throw it all away by engaging in massive recruiting violations that could cost him his job and get him and his team suspended from competition. Tenth, the utter lack of any facts or evidence cutting the other way. Even Ryan, who's quick to whine about virtually everything, hasn't said a single sour word toward PSU about this. *** How about you. Do you have any facts that this was a massive conspiratorial rule-violating poaching of a competitor, planned and executed by those evil cackling PSU miscreant coaches? I'll wait.

Because it's what the facts point to. I think maybe you're just more willing to accuse decent people of massive fraud and recruiting violations than I am, and more willing to assume the existence of sprawling nefarious conspiracies on the thinnest of pretexts. In any case, it's hardly the best version of events for Penn State. They did an even-up trade for a guy who may or may not gel with his teammates, who has one less year of eligibility and has a history as a bit of a hothead, while losing the homegrown recruit. The Starocci tweet suggests they didn't adequately vet it with the team, and the fact that Ryder left suggests they didn't make enough of an effort to secure his buy-in. I'd say it's just about the worst version of events for PSU, unless one is willing to demean themselves with baseless accusations of lying, fraud, violations, conspiracies, etc.

What I mean is that there's two basic kinds of NIL money: (1) the money you get from the school-sanctioned (but not controlled) cooperative/collective, and (2) the separate-money athlete-specific deals, usually used as inducement to transfer. The first kind is what everyone gets -- at least at the larger universities. At PSU, that's Happy Valley United. It's an online store and means if hiring an athlete, but also collects membership funds and donations and uses it to pool money and provides a monthly stipend, the amount of which generally varies by sport. Each school varies, but a (dated) explanation of PSU's is here. The second kind is the Iowa/Bob Nichols stuff, e.g. "Tell Buchanan I'll pay him $500K to stand out front of my slummy apartments for 2 hours holding a 'for rent' sign if he transfers here." (Or whatever happened.) No doubt Starocci got himself one of those deals to stay for a 5th year too. What I'm hypothesizing is that, in Welsh's case, it was probably just the first. When he called and said "I wanna go there" I would imagine PSU said "great, here's what we can give in scholarships next year (if anything), and here's what our NIL collective pays per month." Of course, all of the above is poised to be radically altered with the NCAA/House settlement, and maybe it already is (to some degree), but I'm still getting my arms around that like everyone else.

I tend to agree, although I don't fault Ryder. Even if PSU did nothing wrong, it's not unreasonable for Ryder to say, "Look, competition's great, but let's be real, the wrestle-off is a coin flip, and one of my goals is to be a 4x AA. I can get good competition at OSU too, and not have to worry about beating out a NCAA runner-up to get my spot." PSU also has to be careful in this situation to not do something that makes Ryder think they prefer Welsh. It's a fine line between PSU just "not saying no" and PSU being perceived by Ryder as going out of their way to lure in Welsh once he expressed his interest.

It's an interesting question what PSU should do in this situation. Let's assume (and I know some question this) that Welsh's transfer was initiated by Welsh, and PSU, knowing he was a luxury but not a need, didn't do much more than say "sure we'd love to have you" without throwing any NIL money at him (at least not beyond what the cooperative pays). Let's also assume that Welsh and Ryder are basically interchangeable. (I think they are.) Questions: --Should PSU have checked with Ryder first? --If they check with him, and he says "I don't want that, I'll transfer if you bring him in," should they let Welsh transfer anyway? Or should they say "Sorry Rocco, we're good, maybe try somewhere else." One answer is that while PSU should give Ryder a courtesy heads up, PSU should bring Welsh in no matter what, on the theory that you should never turn down new talent (unless he's got personal baggage). If a guy doesn't want to compete for their spot, that's counter to the team's open-door philosophy, and they're probably better off elsewhere anyway. But on the other hand, I feel like this is a net loss for PSU. They make an even exchange, Ryder for Welsh, but Welsh has one less year of eligibility, and they don't know how Welsh will gel with the team. And other PSU recruits, especially those who bonded with Ryder, feel unsettled/annoyed, destabilizing the team. I think I lean toward the first answer, but curious what others think.

Horrifying as the concept is, I do sort of like the idea of AJ getting stuck on the bench behind Barr for 3 years...

This one's pretty good.

Vega is a freak. Manhandled two of PA's best in Perry a few months back, and Parkins this past weekend. He's D1 ready now but I do think he'd benefit from a redshirt, and then be part of the '26-'27 OSU team (with Robideau, Lockett, Ross, Forrest, etc) that will be PSU's first real challenge in years.

I'm fine with being in the minority. Heck, I'm doubly in the minority, as I thought Wyatt should get OW (they gave it to Carter) while Carter should get the Hodge (which went to Wyatt). Doesn't mean I'm right -- there's a reasonable case to be made for the other viewpoint -- but being in the minority doesn't mean I'm wrong, either. In any case, being told to look at the "scoreboard," and seeing how every other post you make is a personal attack on Starocci, tells me you're not so much interested in the right person getting these awards, and more interested in it not going to a member of a team you dislike. A tad shallow, don't you think? I get that you're an Iowa fan, but it's a shame you're not a wrestling fan too.

Lol. I'm not specifically saying Carter's 6 pins are more impressive than Wyatt's 13, but I do discount the value of Wyatt's pins somewhat given the weight class he's in. I'd say the same for Parris last year. But it cuts the other way too. I value Hendrickson's techs at HWT a bit more highly than I would if he weren't a HWT, so his 8 vs. Carter's 10 is very impressive. Because it cuts both ways, I'm fine with comparing HWTs and non-HWTs by bonus %. What I don't like is reducing it to a "score," e.g. Hendrickson's "score" is 5.13 vs. 4.89 for Carter (I'm making that up since I don't recall the actual scores), since I think it artificially inflates HWTs over non-HWTs. Stick to bonus %. I think I'm backed up in this point by the fact that WIN used to have separate criteria for "dominance" and "number of pins." The scrapped "number of pins," leaving only "dominance," implicitly recognizing that pins are only one form of dominance and don't merit special attention. What do you think?

Yes, it's a massive difference, but year in and year out, the trend olds: HWTs are easiest to pin. Echoing what okokzach said above, I do agree it's mostly a function of size discrepancy at the D1 level. The biggest pinners are always the biggest dudes. It also helps explain your point about Trumble, who was a 197lber 2 years ago and wrestled 97kg last year. Wyatt must have 50 pounds on him easy. None of this is to denigrate Wyatt in any way, who is a freak of an athlete. But if you show me a 283lb HWT with 10 pins and a 149lber with 10 pins, I'd say the 149lber is probably the more dominant wrestler.

Yes "choosing" would be wild. If that's what someone said. Which no one did.

So I guess if some random misguided PSU fan gave Wyatt the nickname "Stalldrickson" then Carter should've gotten the Hodge.

In case you missed it, I was responding to a post that asked: "Honest question - Wrestler A majors 90% of his opponents. Wrestler B pins 75% of theirs. Are you going to call A more dominant?" So I gave an honest answer. It's weird that you won't let a guy answer that without getting all defensive on Wyatt's behalf. Obviously if I'm a coach, I'd rather have pins from my HWT than majors. I don't care how unsightly or grotesque the technique, I just want my 6 points. But as a fan assessing dominance, a pin at HWT just isn't as big an accomplishment. Lots of mediocre heavies racking up the falls. Conversely, not as many HWTs (vs other weights) have the mobility and athleticism and skill to rack up pins and techs, so that tells more about how good that HWT is.

Actually you were comparing a 90% major rate vs. a 75% pin rate, which is what I commented on. Now you're changing the question. What I'm saying is that the difficulty of pinning your opponent is lower in the HWT category, and the difficulty of running up the score is higher. That impacts how I view HWT dominance vs other weights. So, in HWT, and only in HWT, I'm more impressed by 90% majors over 75% pins.

I didn't even mention Wyatt in my comment. I was talking about heavyweights in general, and the fact that I look at bonus points by heavyweights a bit differently than other weights. I don't think I'm alone either. But since you ask: do I doubt Wyatt was outclassing his opponents? No, not at all. Nor am I questioning his athleticism, which is tremendous. What I'm just saying that, on average, heavyweights are easier to pin than non-heavyweights. Every data point backs that up. What that means is if you put Wyatt's athleticism and skill set in a 197lber's body, he'd likely have half as many pins. Simple fact is, he's in a weight class where getting a win by fall is much easier than in other weights. It's something to consider when evaluating how dominant a heavyweight is.

If I'm being honest, I'd pick B in any weight class but HWT. With heavyweights, I'd pick Wrestler A. In high school, our HWT *always* had the most falls each year, even though he was average at best. HWTs just have a way of rolling on their back and not being able to get off, like a stuck turtle. At your average HS state tournament, probably every single HWT there pinned more than 75% of their opponents, while it's more of a rarity in other weights. Doesn't mean HWTs are the most dominant. It just means they get pinned more easily. D1 isn't high school, but the NCAA's "Most Dominant Wrestler" award is pretty much *always* won by a HWT. Parris, Cassioppi and Wyatt have always been at/near the top. Even if they take losses, it doesn't matter much, since so many big boys do the fat man roll and get stuck. The NCAA tracks overall pins too. This past season, 3 of the top 4 falls leader in D1 were HWTs. None of them even qualified for NCAAs. The falls leader for D2 and D3? HWT and HWT. So yeah. In general, I'm going to be far more impressed by a HWT who majors or techs most of his opponents. It tells me he can do more than just squash his guy with his size. It tells me he's actually outclassing them.

Great pickup for OSU, and nice to see him reunited him with Taylor. I see him having a Barraclaugh-like season, probably placing top 5. Maybe even top 3 if he goes 165, as I'm not sure who beats him outside of Mesenbrink and probably Caliendo. This is a guy who beat Haines at OTTs and gave Burroughs all he wanted. Lockett is a beast but I'm not sure he's beating Facundo, at least not right away.

This is a weird thread. Are you seriously saying the Flo crew preferred Starocci to suck up to PSU/NLWC, as opposed to that being their actual objective preference? Based on what? I don't buy it. I have my issues with the Flo crew, mostly that they hold their punches and are afraid to criticize a program since they're fearful of losing access to film. But that's an across-the-board problem, and doesn't come into play with the Hodge. There's no track record of pro-PSU bias. The other school is OSU, and they have every reason to maintain good relations with OSU/Taylor. It's not like Starocci is an unreasonable choice; in fact it's the right choice, IMO. Pyles' tweet is also correct: there's a reasonable argument to be made for both Carter and Wyatt. I get that Pyles grates on people, but I don't think there's any reason to think their Hodge preferences weren't honestly held.

Willie also said that Buchanan and Teemer were each getting 500K for a semester (here). So I can infer you accept those figures as accurate? Except he *didn't* confirm right away, as was reported. And much of what he said is easily disprovable by others, e.g. that he received multiple cash offers, that he asked for and had a meeting with OSU coaches to get him better partners, that he was angry with them about redshirting, etc. You literally have zero evidence he is being in any way dishonest, everything he says is consistent with what we already knew... yet you call him a liar. I think that's sad. Oooh so now you're back to "believe the athlete"? LOL. Okay. Is "lesser recruits" the issue, or coaching? Glazier was the #32 overall recruit. Buchanan wasn't even top 100. Yet they ran Glazier out of town despite 5 years in the Iowa room, to bring in a guy coached up by others. Seems to me Iowa is holding its homegrown guys accountable for the coaches' shortcomings. To be clear, I'm all for welcoming top guys, via the portal or otherwise. The issue I have with Iowa is that their loyalty bar is lower than every other D1 school, by a LOT. It's one thing to bring in top talent to deepen the room, or to fill a gap, or simply to not say "no" when someone says they want to come... but another thing entirely to specifically seek out and induce via big dollars ($500K per your source) someone for the express purpose of displacing your home-grown, high-end 6th-year recruit, coming off a 25-4 record, and running him out of town. It's the most disloyal thing I've ever seen in college wrestling -- and that's saying something, given the overall commercialization of college sports. Ah, so we're back to "Iowa guys tell the truth but PSU guys lie" right? I'm happy for Buchanan. He seems like a quality guy. Unlike you, I won't accuse him of lying. But I'd be appreciative of anyone who paid me $500K for a season's work too. And where's Glazier's interview?